Addendum 3 - MESA RFP.pdf

JPL 7183, R 11/12

Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology

4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena, California 91109-8099

(818) 354-4321

September 17, 2025

Attention: Prospective Bidders

Subject: Request for Proposal (RFP) Addendum No. 03 to JPL RFP No.

CZ-2664-06012025

This addendum is provided to all proposers for clarification of the subject RFP for Mechanical Engineering Support and Assistance (MESA).

1. Attachment A-14 – Past Performance: Please clarify that a proposing prime subcontractor's lower-tiered subcontractors' related experience citations are not allowed?

JPL’s Answer to Question 1: Attachment A-14 “Past Performance” requests the five most recent contracts performed by your organization as the prime which are similar to the effort described in this RFP.

2. General Instructions - Section 7.0 – Restrictive Markings: Please confirm which proposal volume should include the list of technical or proprietary data that will carry restrictive markings under the “Rights in Data – General” and “Limitation on Restrictive Markings” provisions.

Should this be provided in Volume I (Technical/Management) or in a separate attachment?

JPL’s Answer to Question 2: The information should be provided in Phase I and Phase II responses if applicable.

3. Proposal Instructions: The introductory discussion of Phases 1–3 states that Phase 2 requires submission of both Volume II (Cost/Price Proposal) and Volume III (Representative Work Orders). Can JPL please clarify whether these two volumes are to be submitted together as a single Phase 2 package, or if Volume II (Cost/Price Proposal) is due first with Volume III (RWOs) to follow as a separate submission?

JPL’s Answer to Question 3: Phase II proposal response due date will require the submission of both Volume II - Cost/Price Proposal and Volume III - Representative Work Orders.

4. Proposal Instructions: Would JPL clarify table of contents, acronym lists, and cover letter are not page counted?

JPL’s Answer to Question 4: The table of contents, acronym lists, and cover letter are included in the page count.

5. CPFF MESA Std Subcontract Final Reference 3.12.5: How will the lower-tiered subcontractors who are further than 150 miles from JPL be compensated for their travel to JPL?

JPL’s Answer to Question 5: As stated in the Standard Subcontract, paragraph 3.12, Subcontractor personnel and sub-tiers shall work off-site (their own facility) and on-site at JPL at no extra travel cost to JPL. One exception will be travel to remote locations and to perform work at such locations (non-JPL sites) as designated on the SWO.

6. CPFF MESA Std Subcontract Final Reference 3.12: The subcontract specifies that interactions with JPL employees should focus on technical, performance, and cost aspects of the SWO. Can JPL please clarify the boundary between technical collaboration (e.g., discussing potential improvements to current work) and marketing of future services?

JPL’s Answer to Question 6: Discussing a potential improvement to a current or active Subcontract Work Order is acceptable. Soliciting new work or work not relating to an active Subcontract Work Order is not acceptable.

7. Reference RFP Criterion T3 Cybersecurity and Facility Clearance - Factor 1: Cybersecurity; and Reference Standard Subcontracts 3.14 JPL Furnished IT Systems: Could JPL please clarify whether prime subcontractors are required to use JPL-managed systems, or if the use of a prime subcontractor’s own systems is acceptable? If acceptable, is there a stated preference between the two options?

JPL’s Answer to Question 7: JPL's preference is the use of JPL-furnished IT systems. The subcontractor can request an exception to this requirement, which would be subjected to the evaluation of JPL Cybersecurity for approval or rejection.

8. Reference RFP Criterion T2 Technical Capabilities of Facilities, Equipment, and Tools Factor 1: Facilities and Equipment: Given JPL's recent return to work policies and desire to have highly responsive local contractors, will JPL consider reducing the facility distance to less than 150 miles?

JPL’s Answer to Question 8: The subcontract requirement in Article 1 is a facility within approximately one hundred and fifty miles (150) miles driving distance of JPL.

9. Reference RFP Criterion T3 - Cybersecurity and Facility Clearance Factor 1: Could you elaborate on "managed care"? Would this be JPL-supplied computers or JPL configuration and telemetry as currently deployed by JPL onto contractor equipment?

JPL’s Answer to Question 9: Article 1 of the Subcontract, paragraph 3.14, states JPL-furnished managed systems (to include Virtual Desktops) will include any hardware, software, or interconnected system or subsystem of equipment that is used to process, manage, access, or store NASA or JPL data, including electronic information.

10.CPFF MESA Std Subcontract Final Section 9: States that estimated cost and fee will be negotiated in advance for each SWO. Can JPL confirm that the fixed fee is established per SWO based on estimated cost (i.e., plan), and remains fixed regardless of actual cost performance?

Additionally, can JPL clarify whether the intent is to negotiate a consistent fee rate across SWOs, or whether the fee percentage may vary from one SWO to another?

JPL’s Answer to Question 10: The subcontractor shall propose a fixed fee percentage. This fee will be applied to all SWOs for the term of the subcontract. Payment of this fee is based upon the technical completion of the work.

11.Reference RFP Criterion T2, Factor 2 Tools: Does JPL intend to provide all required hardware and software to the MESA prime subcontractor for contract execution?

JPL’s Answer to Question 11: Yes, JPL intends to provide the JPL-furnished managed systems to the prime subcontractor following subcontract execution.

12.Proposal Instructions Representative Work Orders (RWOs): One section specifies three RWOs, other parts of the RFP reference two RWOs. Can JPL please confirm how many hypothetical RWOs will be required?

JPL’s Answer to Question 12: JPL will be requesting a response to two

(2) Representative Work Orders (RWOs).

RWO #1 Cost Reimbursable RWO #2 Fixed Price

13.Proposal Instruction JPL Subcontractor Environmental, Health and Safety Requirements – Form 2885: Could you please clarify which revision of JPL 2885 should be used for this proposal submission?

JPL’s Answer to Question 13: JPL Subcontractor Environmental, Health and Safety Requirements – Form 2885 Revision 10/23 should be used.

14.Proposal Instructions: Clarify how JPL differentiates between partners (e.g., proposed teammates with committed workshare) and lower-tier subcontractors (e.g., vendors or specialty providers without defined workshare).

JPL’s Answer to Question 14: JPL does not define the contractual relationship between the prime and their associates whether it is a lower tier partner for specialty work or unique arrangement. For instance, the prime subcontractor may factor their lower-tier small business partners in reporting the 51% subcontracting requirement.

15.Reference RFP Criterion T1 - Technical Capabilities of Team and Personnel, Factor 5 Evidence of Quality Management System: Are the offeror’s ISO 9000 or AS9100C certification and date of the most recent Quality Management System (QMS) audit included in the page limit or can they be included in the copy of the Quality Management Plan?

JPL’s Answer to Question 15: The certification and date can be included in the Quality Assurance Plan.

16.Attachment A-14 – Past Performance: Is the maximum number of past performance examples for Past Performance A-14 is five (5) and those 5 examples are the only past performance that can be discussed in the Relevant Experience section of the proposal? Would JPL consider limiting Attachment A-14 to five contracts, while still allowing Offerors to describe additional projects in Criterion R1?

JPL’s Answer to Question 16: Yes, the maximum number of past performance examples for Past Performance A-14 is five (5). Those examples must be included in the Related Experience discussion.

Additional projects can be discussed in Related Experience.

17.Reference RFP Criterion T1, Factor 5 Evidence of Quality Management System: Requires offerors to provide evidence of ISO 9000 or AS9100C certification. Since AS9100D is the current standard that supersedes Rev C, can JPL please confirm that AS9100D certification will be required in fulfillment of this criterion, and clarify whether the intent was for offerors to align with the latest AS9100 revision?

JPL’s Answer to Question 17: Certification is required to the latest revision of AS9100, which is Rev D. Addendum. If you are not certified to the standard and rather, you are claiming that you are ‘compliant’ to the standard (AS9100D), then JPL’s Procurement Quality Assurance (PQA) auditor will perform a Quality Management System (QMS) audit against the AS9100D standard to verify compliance, by which JPL would then be able to add your organization to the Approved Supplier List (ASL) via AS9100D QMS audit.

18.Reference RFP General Instructions Page 6 Volume I Evaluation Criteria Table: Shows RWOs as criteria, but the instructions for the RWOs lists them as part of Phase 2 of this RFP. Can you confirm that on our Phase 1 submittal of Technical/Management Volume I, no RWO response is required?

JPL’s Answer to Question 18: Page 2 of the General Instructions states that the Representative Work Order exercise will be a part of Phase II response. RWO response is not required for Phase I.

The RFP due date is not changed by this addendum.

As required by the RFP’s General Instructions, indicate receipt of this and any other addendums relative to the subject RFP. Attachment A-1 must be submitted to JPL with your proposal.

Sincerely, Christine Zuro Subcontracts Manager 26 | Acquisition M: 747.261.8835 Christine.M.Zuro@jpl.nasa.gov